"ເງິນໃນຄອບຄົວສາມາດມີຄວາມຫມາຍທີ່ແຕກຕ່າງກັນ"

ຈິດຕະວິທະຍາ: Does the couple always perceive the situation when the wife earns more as unconventional, unusual, or is this option sometimes acceptable for both partners?¹

Vyacheslav Moskvichev: First of all, this situation is perceived as unusual by the majority in our country, in our society. Therefore, the family is guided by these ideas and expectations. And when such a situation arises, when the wife turns out to be more than the husband, each of them is under the pressure of cultural notions. And what these ideas mean for them — whether it means that the head of the family is changing or that someone is not fulfilling their role, which is prescribed by culture — depends largely on what ideas each of the two is under the influence of and how they are together. solve this problem. Because it really is a challenge. And in our situation, in our culture, it requires really conscious actions from both partners.

It is in Russian culture? Do you think that in the West this stage has already been passed, that this situation has become more commonplace?

VM: Not so long ago, I would say: in our culture, in principle, in traditional countries. In most countries, the role of a man is to earn money and be responsible for external relations. And this patriarchal discourse was dominant not only in our culture. But indeed, European countries are now giving a woman more opportunities to become autonomous, to be on an equal footing, to start earning no less than her husband, or to maintain a separate budget. And of course, in the countries of Western Europe, the United States, Australia, this is a more common practice than ours. For now, at least.

Although among those who turn to a psychologist for help, it can no longer be said that this is a rare situation. Of course, in most cases, men earn more. To be honest, there are many studies that show the dependence of earnings on gender: for the same job, so far women receive less pay than men.

Interestingly, when we asked this question as an abstract question to various male acquaintances — “How would you feel about the fact that your wife earns more than you?”, — everyone answered cheerfully: “Well, this is very convenient, let her earn. Great situation. I will rest». But when this situation develops in reality, agreements are still required, some kind of discussion of the new state of affairs. What do you think?

VM: Certainly the topic of money needs to be discussed. And this discussion is often, unfortunately, difficult. Both in the family and outside the family. Because money, on the one hand, is simply the equivalent of an exchange, and on the other hand, in relationships, money acquires completely different meanings. It cannot be said that this is only one meaning. For example, the idea “money is power”, “who has money, has power” suggests itself. And this is largely true. And when a man starts earning less than a woman, the already established stereotype is often called into question — who is the head of the family, who makes decisions, who is responsible for the family?

If a man earns less than a woman and tries to maintain his dominant role, the woman has a perfectly reasonable question: “Why is this?” And then you really have to give up domination and recognize equality.

There are families in which the idea of ​​equality is not questioned from the very beginning. Although it is necessary to make enough efforts, first of all for a man, to admit that it is possible that a woman is equal in relations with him. Because we have a lot of subtle discriminatory statements, such as “female logic” (which means, first of all, the absence of logic), or “female emotionality”, or that “women see trees, and men see forest”. There is a stereotype that a man has a more strategically correct idea of ​​the world. And then suddenly a woman, no matter whether her logic is masculine or feminine, shows herself as capable of earning and bringing more money. At this point there is room for discussion.

It seems to me that in general it is useful to discuss money (who makes what contribution to the family), because money is not the only contribution. But again, often in families, in relationships, in our culture, there is a feeling that a monetary contribution to the family is the most valuable, more valuable than, for example, household chores, atmosphere, children. But if a man is ready to change with a woman who, for example, takes care of a baby, at least for a week, and perform all her functions, then a man can reassess this situation in general and change his ideas about the value of a woman’s contribution.

Do you think that a couple, which is initially set up for equality and is arranged as a union of two equal partners, is easier to cope with a situation of monetary imbalance?

VM: I think so. Here, of course, there are also a number of questions. For example, the issue of trust. Because we can perceive each other as equal partners, but at the same time not trust each other. Then there are topics such as competition, finding out who has an advantage. By the way, this is no longer a question of equality, but a question of justice. It is quite possible to compete with an equal partner.

That is why often, when both partners earn, there are difficulties in discussing the budget. Not only who earns more, and who earns less, and who makes what contribution to the budget, but also: do we have a common budget or does everyone have their own? Who implements what needs at the expense of the general budget? Is someone pulling the blanket over themselves?

Financial relations largely reflect the interaction of the family in general and in other matters.. Therefore, if it is possible to build financial relations that suit both, and there is a willingness to focus on this, then in general the rules of the game become discussed and more transparent.

Is there an objectively most healthy, competent and effective model for building financial relationships, or does it depend on the couple each time and on what kind of people make up this couple, on their personal characteristics?

VM: Probably, not so long ago, about 20 years ago, the majority, including psychologists, were inclined to believe that there is the most effective and functional family structure. And in this structure, indeed, it was the man who was assigned the role of the earner, and the woman — the creation of an emotional atmosphere, and so on. This is again due to the dominance of patriarchal discourse and the prevailing structure of the economy. Now this situation has changed a lot in our country, especially in big cities. Many men’s professions have become no more profitable than women’s; a woman may well be a top manager, just like a man. It’s not about physical strength.

On the other hand, the question of whether there is a healthier distribution always arises. Because someone thinks it’s healthy when everyone has their own budget, someone thinks that the budget should be transparent. In my opinion, the most healthy situation is when people can openly discuss it and get out of the pressure of stereotypes that seem to be taken for granted. Because often people come together with ready-made ideas about the role of a woman and a man in a family, about the role of money, but these ideas can be very different. And they are not always conscious, because people bring them from their family, their friendly environment. And, bringing them as a matter of course, they may not even pronounce them, they may not understand what is happening to them. And then there is conflict.

I would say that a conflict about money is not always a conflict about money. It is a conflict about understanding, justice, recognition of contribution, equality, respect.… That is, when it becomes possible to discuss all these questions: “Which of us attaches what importance to money in a relationship?”, “When you say that you earn too little, what do you mean?”, “When you say that I being greedy or spending too much — too much in relation to what?», «Why is this so important to you?».

If a couple has the opportunity to discuss these issues, the chance that they will build a relationship that suits them, that will bring them joy, not suffering, increases. Therefore, for me, healthy relationships are, first of all, those relationships that are quite transparent and discussed.

In your experience, how many couples have actually achieved that degree of openness, transparency, and the ability to be aware of these different models and their clash? Or does it still remain a rather rare case, and more often money is a hidden source of tension?

VM: I have several hypotheses here. I am approached by couples who have encountered difficulties in which this issue is not resolved. And about those couples who do not come for a consultation, I can only guess. It is possible that these are the couples who are doing well, in fact, that is why they do not need to come. Or perhaps these are the couples in which this issue is closed, and people are simply not ready to discuss it and raise it with a third person or even together.

Therefore, I now assume that people who are ready to seek help from a psychologist in situations of difficulty are generally focused on finding a solution, on discussion. At least they are ready for this openness. It seems to me that this willingness to discuss is growing. Many understand that men have lost their legal power, that is, all the power that men now have is, by and large, already illegal, it is not fixed in any way. Equality declared.

An attempt to maintain his superiority runs into a man’s lack of arguments. This often leads to conflicts. But someone comes with these conflicts, recognizes this situation, looks for another way, but someone tries to establish this power by force. The topic of violence, unfortunately, is relevant for our society. Often men try to compensate for the loss of power if they start earning less. By the way, this is a common situation: when a man becomes less successful, earns less, then the topic of violence may arise in the family.

You say that money is always power, always control to one degree or another. How is money related to sexuality?

VM: I am not saying that money is always power. It is often about power and control, but often it is also about justice, about love, about care. Money is always something else, in our culture it is endowed with a very large and complex meaning.. But if we are talking about sexuality, sexuality is also endowed with many different meanings, and in some places it clearly intersects with money.

For example, a woman is endowed with a greater degree of sexuality as a sexual object. And a woman can dispose of it: give it or not give it to a man, sell it to a man, and not necessarily in the context of sexual services. Often this idea occurs in the family. A man earns, and a woman must provide him with comfort, including sexual. At this moment, the man must «discharge», and the woman must provide this opportunity. There is an element of trade when a woman can lose contact with her needs, with her desires, leaving them aside.

But if the situation with money changes, if it is now clear that both a man and a woman have a financial contribution, and it is not clear who has more (or it is obvious that a woman has more), then the question about sexual relations immediately changes. : “Why do we think more about your needs? Why aren’t my needs in the spotlight? Indeed, the feeling that sexuality belongs to men who have built a certain culture, sexualized a woman as an object, can be revised if a woman gets more.

A woman can also become more influential, domineering, she, too, may not have enough time for courtship, she, too, may simply want to satisfy her sexual needs. She can also accept a male model. But due to the fact that women have been at a disadvantage for a long time, they are more likely to pay attention to negotiations, they understand the importance of discussion. Therefore, women are now becoming in many ways the driving force for change, the transition from stereotyped, ready-made solutions towards discussed solutions.

By the way, at this moment a lot of new opportunities can open up in the sexual life in the family: there is an orientation towards getting pleasure, when people can begin to please each other. Because for men in general, it is also important and valuable to get pleasure from a partner.

That is, it can be a healthy movement, there is no need to be afraid of this, all these financial changes? Can they give a positive result?

VM: I would even welcome them. The fact is that in many ways they turn out to be painful, but they lead to a revision of views. Painful for those who used to have a privilege, not earned by anything, secured by belonging to the stronger sex. And now that privilege is gone. Men who were not used to this, who believed that their power and advantages over a woman were fixed, suddenly find themselves in a situation where they need to prove these advantages. This can be stressful for men and cause tension in relationships.

In order to somehow relieve tension, you need to bring it into the open space of discussion. You need to find the words to say it, to be ready for it. And for many men, talking about their feelings, their needs, ideas is unusual. It’s not masculine. Their cultural and socio-economic situation has changed, their usual tools of power have been taken away from them. On the other hand, they have not mastered the tools that are needed now: to speak, pronounce, explain, justify their position, act on equal terms with women. They are ready to do it with men, but they are not ready to do it with their partner — a woman. But I like a society where there is more diversity, more discussion, more dialogue.

Of course, for someone who needs power, whose privileges are gone, this is an undesirable move, and they can grieve and get upset about it. But in this case, this movement is inevitable. Yes, I like it. And some people don’t like it. But whether you like it or not, you have to deal with it. Therefore, I suggest that people who find themselves in this situation find new tools. Enter into a dialogue, try to talk about difficult things, including those that are not customary to talk about, and this is primarily money and sex. And find agreements that will meet the needs and interests of both partners.

¹ ການສໍາພາດໄດ້ຖືກບັນທຶກໄວ້ສໍາລັບໂຄງການ Psychology «ສະຖານະ: ໃນຄວາມສໍາພັນ»ໃນວິທະຍຸ«ວັດທະນະທໍາ»ໃນເດືອນຕຸລາ 2016.